Based on their current standing in the polls, the Liberals under Justin Trudeau have the best chance of winning the 2015 federal election. But their victory is not assured, and Stephen Harper's Conservatives have a chance to win a victory of their own. Thomas Mulcair's New Democrats will almost certainly finish third, with Gilles Duceppe's Bloc Québécois and Elizabeth May's Greens finishing fourth and fifth, respectively. A minority government of one hue or the other is the most likely outcome, though a majority is within the realm of plausibility.

The Liberals are projected to win between 124 and 161 seats, putting them just below the 170-seat mark required for a majority. This also gives them a decent amount of overlap with the Conservatives, which is why a Liberal victory is not, by any stretch, a certainty. The party is projected to win between 33.5% and 39.9% of the vote, which gives them a very high likelihood of finishing in first place in the popular vote. It would be an upset if they don't.

The highest probability outcome for the Liberals would be within the low to average band (124 to 146 seats), but the most likely outcome would be between the minimum to high bands. That is a very wide range, and thus not very helpful. But it does show that if the Liberals outperform the average projection, they would be doing better than most parties that had their status in the legislature at dissolution. But of note is that they have a 23% chance of finishing between the high and maximum ranges, which does put them in majority territory.

The precise projection gives the Liberals 37.2% of the vote and 146 seats, their best performance since 2000, when the party last formed a majority government.

The Conservatives are projected to win between 100 and 139 seats. This makes a majority for them a stretch of the imagination, but does put them in a position to potentially win the plurality of seats by a very narrow margin. At the extremity of the likely ranges, that would give the Tories only a 15-seat advantage over the Liberals, while at the other extremity the Liberals would have a 61-seat advantage.

The Conservatives are projected to take between 29.3% and 34% of the vote, and the most likely outcome for them should fall within the average to high projection. That means it could be very close between the Liberals and Conservatives in the seat count, though there is still a one-in-four chance that the Conservatives will under-perform their polling (it is a little more than one-in-two for the Liberals).

The average projection gives the Conservatives 118 seats and 30.9% of the vote, their worst result since 2004, the last time the party sat on the opposition benches.

The NDP is projected to take between 51 and 90 seats. That puts them squarely in the position to become the third party in the House of Commons, with no overlap with either the Conservatives or the Liberals. The party is projected to take between 20.8% and 23.4% of the vote, which also suggests they will finish in third. They have a two-in-five chance of slightly out-performing their polls, falling in the average to high band (which would deliver 66 to 90 seats). They have a two-in-three chance of finishing within the low to high band.

The NDP's average projection gives them 66 seats and 21.7% of the vote, the party's second-best performance in its history.

Relative to the number of seats they are projected to take, the Bloc Québécois has the widest range. They are projected to win between one and 12 seats, which puts them (at the outer edge) just on the cusp of official party status — the party's stated minimum goal. That may be a hard bar to reach.

The Greens are projected to win just one seat, and between 4% and 4.8% of the vote. That puts them roughly where they were in the 2004 and 2006 elections, with the addition of a seat.

Expecting the unexpected

The minimum to maximum projected ranges give an indication of what could plausibly happen on election night, based on how the polls have missed election calls in the past. And this is what these numbers generally represent: a miss by the polls (though, potentially, not all of them).

A few factors are at play here. The first is the momentum the Liberals seem to have (Nanos's polling on October 18 put the party at 39%, while Forum put them at 40% in their one-day poll), and the risk of a bandwagon effect (and strategic voting) pushing them beyond where the bulk of the final polls of the campaign had them. The second is the potential for the Conservatives to outperform their polls by a significant degree, due to the 'shy Tory effect', higher voter turnout among the demographics that are advantageous to them, more resources and better organization, or a combination of these factors.

At the outer edges of plausibility, we could see majority governments for either the Conservatives or the Liberals. We could even technically see a very weak NDP minority government. But these outcomes only occur at the limit of the 95% confidence interval.

More realistically, we could see the Conservatives finish somewhere in the 140 to 160 seat range, which would complicate matters for the opposition parties. Particularly if the Bloc ends up anywhere near its maximum range of 26 seats. We could, of course, also see them fall below the 100-seat mark.

For the Liberals to reach a majority government, they need about 61% of the seats in which they are at play but are not currently projected to win to swing their way. The Conservatives would need that to happen in 76% of the seats in which they are at play but not projected to win, a far higher bar to meet.

A plausible over-achievement for the New Democrats would see them retaining almost all of the seats they won in the 2011 election. If that happens, the Liberals are probably finishing second.

Regional breakdown

The charts below break down the numbers for each of the six regions. The Liberals are favoured to finish first by a wide margin in two of them: Atlantic Canada and Ontario. They are narrowly favoured to win the popular vote in Quebec and British Columbia, but are expected to lose the seat race in both provinces (though not necessarily). They should finish second in the Prairies and in Alberta. If the polls are right, the Liberals could potentially finish first in every province except Alberta and Saskatchewan.

The Conservatives are heavily favoured to win Alberta and the Prairies, and are narrowly behind in British Columbia. They should finish second in Ontario and are in a close race with the New Democrats for that spot in Atlantic Canada. In Quebec, they are vying with the Bloc for the third spot, but are expected to finish fourth.

The NDP is projected to finish third by a wide margin in Alberta, the Prairies, and Ontario. The New Democrats are also slated for third place in British Columbia, with second place finishes in Quebec (though likely with more seats) and, by a hair, in Atlantic Canada.

The Greens are projected to have their best numbers in British Columbia, where they are expected to take between 8.4% and 10% of the vote. The Bloc is projected to take between 18.1% and 21.5% in Quebec, marking its worst performance. It could better its four seats of 2011, however.

Overcoming long odds in a long campaign

When this campaign began, the Liberals were sinking deeper into third as the Conservatives and New Democrats jostled for top spot. The idea that the Liberals would be favoured to win a minority government, and potentially even a majority government, would have been seen as unlikely, to say the least. And yet here we are, with word being from those in the know that there is greater likelihood of the Liberals outperforming their polls as they pick up strategic voters from the NDP, rather than the Conservatives pulling off an upset.

The Liberals have the momentum and have big numbers in Ontario. These two factors alone could be enough to carry them through. Indications that the party is doing surprisingly well among francophones in Quebec and could win more seats than previously believed in places like Alberta are strong signals that the safe money would be on the Liberals tonight.

But Conservative parties in Canada have made a habit of beating expectations on election night. And why not? Their supporters tend towards the older, as do voters. In a campaign where Stephen Harper has been (rightly or not) vilified, and in which identity politics reared its ugly head, why wouldn't poll respondents be reluctant to say they intend to vote Conservative? Both of these factors could give the Conservatives a boost at the ballot box. Maybe not the five points that some think is plausible, but just enough to turn an easy Liberal victory into a nail biter. On the other hand, after 10 years in office and a lacklustre campaign, maybe their supporters simply don't show up.

And what of the NDP? Their incumbents can be tough to beat, proving resilient in a number of elections in which the NDP had a far slimmer chance of forming government than they have today. And perhaps the vote splits in Quebec will work in their favour, rather than against them. Combined, that could easily boost the NDP closer to the 100-seat mark than they are currently projected to hit, which has the potential to hurt the Liberals in their quest for victory.

But these are only plausible what-if scenarios. The Liberals should win tonight, based on the data that is available. Will they? And, if so, will it be a minority or majority government?

On a personal note, I'd like to thank everyone reading for making the Poll Tracker and this site such a tremendous success during the election campaign. It has been very rewarding and endlessly enjoyable to work with such a great organization as the CBC, and to get such fantastic support from the wonderful team at the CBC Parliamentary Bureau in Ottawa (and, lately, in Toronto). It has also been rewarding to see how much fun many of you have had following the trends with me over the last few months. I hope the results on Monday night will show it was worthwhile to follow the polls and my analyses in this roller-coaster of an election campaign. Now it's up to you: go vote!

Wonderfully well-balanced analysis of the available data, Éric, as usual. The votes tomorrow will show how representative those data have been. Hope you enjoy a well-earned rest from updating and commenting tomorrow, before the post-mortem begins on Tuesday!

All signs point to a comfortable Liberal minority. I am looking forward to the beginning of a new progressive era. The Liberals under Trudeau Jr. are a different breed then they were under Chretien/Martin. Trudeau's team is more ambitious, modern and left-leaning (with technocratic elements). Chretien and Martin just went with where the wind blew - being in government for the sake of being in government.

Conservatives should not be disheartened though. This is a perfect time to reflect and recalibrate the Tory message for the future. A "kinder and gentler" Tory party will work better in the long term. This is not a landslide defeat for them. They are a well funded and well organized party with a strong base. If they end up with more the night with more than 100 MPs - they are doing okay.

The NDP, whether they win 50 seats or 90 seats have some soul searching to do. What is the purpose of their party going forward? If they couldn't win in 2015 under ideal scenarios - would they ever form government? I suspect the NDP will be torn whether to tack back to the left or follow the centrist route. I think post-Mulcair would also see some divisions between the traditional wing and the Quebec wing.

"The NDP, whether they win 50 seats or 90 seats have some soul searching to do."

IMO, the sole thing the NDP needed to concentrate on from 2011 to 2015 was that the LPC stayed in third place. They failed on that. (Ironically enough, I think that would also have been in the long-term interest of the CPC; a left-right dichotomy is easier for both the NDP and the CPC; a situation where the Liberals are in first or second always leads to the notion that the CPC are to the right, the NDP to the left, and so people will vote for the middle, where the LPC reign.).

Your last paragraph hits the nail on the head. I would just add that the NDP to become a credible party for government must address their English-Canada problem. They are lucky to garner 25% of the vote in English Canada. This campaign they seemed totally oblivious to this reality even though it has been the history of the party since its founding. Winning 11% of the seats in English Canada should be an embarrassment, sadly, it is one of the NDP's better performances.

Thanks Eric! I've followed the poll tracker almost daily in this crazy campaign, which is insane considering how long it has been going on. Well now it's over and you've done it. Good election night to everyone.

I must say, Trudeau ran one of the great campaign's in the history of Canadian politics. He chose not to go negative, unlike Harper, and surprisingly Mulcair, and decided to run in a way that shows the very best character of Canadians - positive, enthusiastic, optimistic intelligence (so easy to have negative or sarcastic intelligence), overcoming as an underdog. Considering all the hate thrown his way, I don't think I could have responded like Trudeau did. Just a very modern, Canadian way to run for Prime Minister.

I agree. Both the NDP and Conservatives served up lukewarm plates of nothing in particular. So they made space for Trudeau and the Liberals. To their considerable credit, they exploited that space about as well as I have ever seen it done in half a century.

Peter, great points. I think Harper didn't propose anything "new" because he didn't want to get his far right wing base angry with him. The Conservatives are making the same mistakes that the Ontario PC's made, The Conservatives might not be in power for a generation if the don't come back to the PC middle.

Fred if you can't cut don't do it !! If you look at Harper's entire time in power the biggest and most obvious attribute is CUT !! Whether taxes, expenses, civil servants or services that was always the big driver !! CUT !!

The big issue I will be looking at tonight Eric is one aspect of your methodology that has been in question since the beginning and which you have acknowledged is probably the weakest aspect of your projections: the regional breakdown and the "incumbent effect".

Nowhere does your analysis and projections seem weaker than when that aspect of them is focused on. As I believe you put it half a year ago, the "incumbent effect" is a likely outcome UNLESS the country is in the mood to change the government. At that point, it overstates the likely regional outcome as the incumbent effect melts away.

Looking at the projections, I can't see how the Tories perform as well as projected in Atlantic Canada and Quebec. Your regional projections have the Tories with 14 seats as we move East to West.

IF the Tories are elected or leading tonight in more than 5 ridings by the time they hit the Ontario border, moving East to West, I will be AMAZED.

My bet: The "incumbent effect" is overstated in these regional results.

I remember reading the results of a survey done years ago that stated that Canadians living in large metropolitan areas were considerably more likely to base their vote on party platforms than other Canadians. People living in rural areas and smaller urban centres were more likely to base their vote on their assessment of the personal qualities of the candidates. It would be interesting to see if this still holds true, which I suspect it does.

If so, one would expect that incumbents in rural/smaller urban areas have greater incumbent effects than those in cities like Toronto, Montreal, or Vancouver.

Huh? I don't understand your comment at all. Are you saying Americans are dumb for re-electing Obama in 2012? Or that Americans are dumb because the Republican candidate might be Donald Trump in November 2016 against probably Hillary Clinton?

Where are the range probabilities listed? (e.g. "The highest probability outcome for the Liberals would be within the low to average band"). That info used to be there before the poll tracker made its way to the CBC. I can understand why it was removed, though - most people don't seem to really understand it.

Great job on the site. I've been reading and listening to it quite religiously over the election campaign, Though I have a preferred election outcome, obviously, I'm also hoping your model outperforms expectations!

Alright, final prediction time has come! Note that due to time constraints, I have not been able to reflect actual candidacies to ridings, meaning that a party not presenting a candidate in a riding still is in my model (I can think of at least two ridings off the top of my head where that would be wrong). Also, I updated my model to 338 ridings a while back and, since then, it seems some of the names have changed... well, not in my model, they haven't! And on top of that, all the riding names are in French. Yes, even in Alberta, or BC or wherever. It was easier for me to copy-paste one block and, since I'm a francophone, I figured I'd favour French, even if it's not necessarily logical. So here we go!

So my model isn't very kind to the LPC using the actual aggregate, but in the extreme ranges, it actually hands them a crushing majority. The CPC can only dream of a majority at this point, as the model doesn't show that it's a possibility for them. The NDP has an outside chance of winning the election, but everything would have to go right for them, so that is extremely unlikely.

On the other side, the LPC looks at almost tripling its seats in a worst case scenario. That wouldn't really be a loss, especially since not making it to at least official opposition is unlikely. The CPC may be reduced to third party if they can't make gains in those tight races and that would be considered catastrophic. For the NDP though, they could be sent back down to almost pre-2011 numbers and that would be a major blow to its credibility, especially after spending 4 years in the spotlight (compared to the LPC) as the official opposition.

The BQ is looking to make small gains and could potentially make it to official party status within the plausible ranges. It could also make an almost exact repeat of the last election in those same ranges. In the extremes, it's looking at being completely wiped out or being a modereately strong presence in the house. The GPC is looking at gaining one seat at all ranges and, obviously, that is May's seat.

Of note, I have Mulcair losing his seat in Outremont and Duceppe winning his in Laurier-Sainte-Marie. I have not given Mulcair any boost whatsoever as, the two times I did that in previous elections, it actually turned out to be a mistake (one of those was Marois losing her seat, can't remember the other). I'll be posting all the seat predictions shortly.

You are using the older (2011 - not 2015) ridings on the Prairies. You might want to re-do your analysis. Check out your Saskatoon, Regina and Alberta ridings. There are different ones now that the boundaries have been re-drawn and will definitely affect your analysis.

The turning point in the campaign was when Trudeau blew the dog whistle.

By making public his inner circle was getting cash from the pipelines, he gave a clear indication that he like past good liberal governments is an arm of big business and economic growth and stability.... basically run on the Left and govern from the Centre-right.

I'm not sure even the full 30% really like Harper's Conservatives. I believe a portion of them are Tories who just really cannot see themselves voting Liberal or NDP, and so tell pollsters they are Conservative even though they are not very enthusiastic or supportive of Harper.

The final Ekos poll had some interesting numbers showing the Conservatives are the least engaged of the three parties' electorates in this election - the opposite from what I suspect was the case in previous ones.

I think we could see less than 30% of the vote share going Conservative, not because they lost those supporters, but because their supporters are less enthusiastic about getting out to vote this time.

I think the Conservatives themselves may be afraid of soft support, which is why the last month has been mostly about (unsuccessfully) riling up their base.

Based on the conversations I overheard on the streets of Edmonton, this morning, this appears to be correct. CPC supporters seem relieved to have been freed from their obligation to support Stephen Harper.

You buried the lede Ira. The issue is not who likes/doesn't like the Conservatives, the issue is that the Conservatives have governed to attract that 30% + 5% more at election, and devil take the rest. Why would they not have developed a more pragmatic approach to retail politics?

Other good news for the Liberals in the poll results is that EKOS has a historical tendency to favour the Green Party at the expense of the Liberals (no idea why). So EKOS might have the Liberals a point or two low.

Oh, and BTW, thanks for your hard work, Eric! I may be posting my numbers here, but without your aggregate, I wouldn't have anything to post. And your articles are much more in-depth than whatever I post and they are always very interesting. Great work you're doing!

Looks to me like this will be a lot like 2006, where the Libs went from govt to 103 seats, Cons up to 124, others 80. The question becomes can the Cons do a better job than the Libs did in replacing their old leader. Dion/Ignatieff were a terrible combo for the next 2 leaders for the Libs (who knew Rae might have been their best choice). I'm hoping someone like Michael Chong will take over but realistically it'll be a far right candidate who will lead the Cons over the cliff next election unless Trudeau screws up big time.

I'm betting on the Greens getting 3-4 seats tonight and surprising people. Candidates matter, as does focus. The Greens have been focused on a handful of ridings. It worked with May last time and should work for a few people this time even though the media/Cons/NDP fought hard to keep Greens out of sight/out of mind.

"...realistically it'll be a far right candidate who will lead the Cons over the cliff next election..."

I don't know enough to make conclusions, but this would be the worst outcome for everyone, and hopefully this isn't what happens. The Ontario PCs have stacked the deck against them by choosing another right-winger over Christine Elliot. The best choice for the federal Tories would be a real Red Tory who can lend credibility to the idea of the big tent. I don't think it matters what part of the country he or she is from- I can think of people from multiple regions who could get the job done.

I predict a Liberal majority! The NDP will be routed and reduced to a rump in Quebec! Joe Oliver, Megan Leslie, Murray Rankin, Robert Chisholm will all be defeated and the Greens will win a second seat (probably Victoria).

Forum has the Liberals winning 171, thus a bare majority.I would not be surprised if they are right. I would also not be surprised to see the Conservative Party virtually wiped out just as they were in 1993. The electorate dislikes Harper at least as much as they disliked the Mulroney/Campbell Tories.I also expect that a very bitter Harper will plug the Senate with extreme right wing partisan Conservatives at the very last minute, betraying everything he claimed to have stood for. A sad end to a sad career.

While the GG was a Tory when appointed, there is a strong tendency to put aside politics for the good of the nation. David Johnston was capable of doing the best for the University of Waterloo, he is capable of doing the best for Canada.

During the writ period certain appointments can not be made including; to the judiciary, the diplomatic corps and Senate. Exceptions can be made of course during times of crisis or emergency but, there is no chance Harper will appoint more senators between now and Nov. 4th.

Glen,

Johnston is not a partisan Tory! Don't write unflattering conjecture about someone you know nothing or little about-much less his personal views or politics! Stop writing unfounded and untruthful conjecture please, you make yourself look foolish and make the Liberals appear vindictive and hyper-partisan.

Nanos conducts daily tracking for The Globe and Mail and CTV. A three-day rolling sample of 2,400 Canadians were contacted through phone (cell and landline) from October 16 to 18. The final poll was published at 10 p.m. ET on Oct. 18. The margin of error is 2 percentage points, 19 times out of 20

Thanks for all your hard work through this marathon campaign, Eric. 308 hasn't made it easier for me as a recovering political junkie, but I greatly appreciate your work all the same. Kudos to you for putting up with all the partisans trying to discredit you and I hope we can continue to see you at the CBC for provincial elections and the next federal one.

Thank you, Eric, for all of his work. It would have been next to impossible to place the polls in context without it. And thanks also to Stephen McMurtry for his wonderful map. Riding names aren't necessarily very informative of where a riding is unless you're familiar with that part of the country.

Let me be the first to officially call this election for Trudeau with a majority government (and probably look foolish in the process)

You heard it hear first! My crazy aunt, who let's just say is "quite far right" and has a picture of Ronald Reagan on her wall, just told me she voted Liberal. "He's destroyed the Conservatives and he's a _____" was her only answer, as she slammed down the phone . This is a woman who has never voted for a Liberal in her life, and still loves Brian Mulroney. If she's angry at them..... my gosh. My original call was 183 seats. I think now it might be even be even higher.

LOL. Thanks. I'd personally like to thank Eric and my aunt for all the insight and hard work in helping me reach my goal. And of course I need to thank my Mother for having me, though she seemed to be a little too talkative, and maybe a bit jealous, of Maggie this morning. :)

But seriously, putting on speculative hat for a moment, Eric's numbers gathering was amazing, and I believe really pushed ABC's to decide this election. It helped people understand that Harpers low point was actually much higher than people thought, at 30% after the Niqab debate, and people had to change their thought process on the election if they wanted the Harpers Conservatives to have no influence on the government whatsoever. I might go far as to say, that Eric might have been the most influential objective observer in this entire election process, and without his gathering, we wouldn't have a majority Liberal government right now.

LOL, Oh, oh. I hope that last sentence doesn't get Eric too much in trouble?

To be truthful, my guess at 183 was based on the idea of gathering all the polls together, weighing them out, and seeing the emotional voting trends on the last day. It was obvious things were breaking huge for the Liberals, even more than some polls indicated. Then just to realize that 2011 was an anomaly, a one off, and those were special factors that needed to be thrown out for this election.

Eric's numbers showed that a Liberal majority was possible, and that vote splitting in Quebec actually could help the Liberals win a majority. You might say without the Bloc, Trudeau might not have such a strong majority right now, and it would be much closer to 170. (polls showed that only 2 -4 % of Block voters would have voted Liberal as their second choice. You give many of those numbers to the NDP and Conservatives, even with only 60% of the Block voters redistributed, and the Liberals don't come close to winning 40 seats in Quebec)

Harper was never going to win more than 43 seats in Ontario after mid September, even with Eric's numbers showing higher than 60 seats at some points. You know this by all the strong wins Liberal wins in Ontario and the Tories concentrated rural vote, let alone the obvious landslide that was happening in the 416 and urban 905. Harper had no chance in Ontario with his far right American social conservatism, as he never quite figured out that 2011 was a total anomaly - with so many Ontarioans tired of a minority governments, and fearful of NDP majority.

The real surprise was the total white wash in Atlantic Canada, and BC voting in so many Liberals. I think that's where Eric's number's really influenced what happened, and people wanted an end to Harper voting ABC, and the Maritimes and BC wanting in on the new government.

Eric, great job at even the idea of this site, even if your methodology on seats needs to be worked on a bit. But as you say, that's not really the science of this website. Thanks.

I agree with much of your post here, as just for the idea of this site, Eric she be commended. This site did become essential for ABC's, and the gathering of polls became an important tool for those who wanted Harper's American anti-Canadian Republicanism out.

Nice call on the election numbers, OP, and though I agree with you that this sites seat numbers in Ontario never made sense, considering how hated in the GTA Harper was. Trudeau, though got very lucky to make it to a majority. Your last post even highlights some of the lucky factors, that would be hard to see coming.

Also, voter turnout was much higher than expected, which I know made a few Conservatives on here very angry. I think sites like this one engaged younger voters, and kept them in touch with the election and other Canadians like never before. It's incredible how many times I heard people bring up this site in just every day casual conversation. Undoubtedly CBC noticed that, too.

Eric commented on Mulcair in his post. The model says one thing, but reality is another. I'd like to see Mulcair continue to 2019, but to start at 64/65 and expect to go to 68/69, it might be pushing it.

Whatever happens, I'm dreading the prospect of a majority. For any party. I came to appreciate minority governments after seeing the contrast between Harper with a minority and Harper with a majority. The libs could pass terrible laws if they have no opposition to compromise with.

Anyway, thanks for the great work. It was very fun to follow this blog to see how the campaign progressed.

Hardly. The Conservatives still got 31% of the vote, where they've lived for the past 2.5 years. The ABH wave consolidated support behind Trudeau, and nearly destroyed the NDP, but it had no discernible effect on Harper.

Well - I think this is more a case of ABC turning into a frankenstein monster rather than the calculating strategy it was meant to be. Strategic voting was never intended to also decimate the NDP.

It seems that the message "support whoever is most likely to beat Harper" was more broadly translated to national, rather than the per-riding level, and people were so determined to "make extra sure" Harper was out that it was a steam roll.

It did not always work either. In my riding the NDP was the strategic vote and the Liberal seemed a distant 3rd - the actual result was a perfectly even split between NDP and LPC, allowing the CPC to win. So ABC backfired completely there.

Well, that was a frustrating night. As a Green party supporter and volunteer we fought hard and put up over 4000 signs here in Thunder Bay-Superior North just to see our voters decide to go with the flow and vote Liberal. I just hope Trudeau lives up to his word and changes our system so 500k votes gets more than 1% of what 5 million gets (the Conservatives total, getting 100 seats). The next saddest element is seeing the Bloc get a lifeline again with 10 seats - I really hoped they'd die off at long last.

The Bloc would have died but Harper played the racist card with the niqab issue and unfortunately that stirred things up in the Bloc's favour.This was not a vote against the Green party or even a vote for Trudeau. This was a vote to rid ourselves of the Harper government and we did.Unfortunately there was a lot of collateral damage including heavy losses for the NDP and no gains for the Green.But rejoice, Harper is gone! That was the most important thing.

Duceppe should stay on as leader. He's a good leader, and there's no one else to replace him. And since they don't have official party status anyway, him having a seat in the House doesn't really benefit them.

I generally like the Bloc. They make useful suggestions, and Duceppe has been my favourite Canadian politician for years.

Duceppe only came back because the BQ was doing worse without him. He'll be 72 in 2019. It’s not too old as far as politicians go, but he has only ever seen an increase in BQ votes once out of 7 elections, and the BQ has never had a majority of the popular vote in Quebec.There has been no creditable BQ/PQ plan for a long while and they seem just to be running on momentum. It seems to be telling that after Bouchard, the three other leaders have just over 4 years between them. So it’s a choice of united under a declining Duceppe or dissolving amongst infighting. I’d be very surprised to see them regain Official Party status.

Though you were (very) broadly right, you were also very wrong. Whilst I appreciate all of your efforts, very much so, I suspect your model needs some re-vamping, especially in terms of relying on polling from *very* interested parties.

What? There was a late swing to the Liberals. Once Eric plugs in the actual results as a "poll" we can see how close the model was.

The model doesn't purport to be exact, but numbers of likelihood are attached to the predictions. 69 seats were missed, 23 of them under 60% likelihood, 23 between 61-70%, 12 between 71-80%, 9 between 81-90%, and 2 over 91%.

Most interesting aspects of the numbers... The vote shares were almost identical to 2011 but with different parties in each spot. And, so much for the much-vaunted efficiency of the Conservative vote, they only got 99 seats in a larger parliament with the same percentage the NDP got in 2011.

I'd say it was a perfect storm of the three. Coming in, this was Mulcair's election to lose. Rather than being passive and taking the "save" route, had he pushed back harder, I'd suspect the NDP would have done better. As it was, he was too bland to stand out.

Harper shouldn't have fought this election. Many people who aren't anti-CPC are anti-Harper, and these were definitely Harper's CPC.

Finally, Trudeau ran a generally gaffe-free campaign and just kept digging. The "rude" behaviour at the debates at least undercuts the constant CPC messaging.

Until last night, the prospect of a narrow Liberal or Conservative plurality still seemed in the cards, and people were dusting off their constitutional textbooks to figure out what the next steps were going to be. While a more comfortable Liberal plurality was also becoming credible, I think that anyone predicting a Liberal majority might have been accused of smoking something funny.

The polls were right, in a general sense, but they underestimated the magnitude of the upset. We have never, not once in the history of this country, seen a party go from third place to a majority in one fell swoop.

Now that the Liberals have won a majority with almost exactly the same vote percentage as the CPC did in 2011, will there be widespread calls that Trudeau's government isn't legitimate because over 60% of the voters voted against him?

It's an interesting thing to think about - but I wouldn't be hasty to put up a false equivalence. The issue of left versus right is probably more representative than any attempts to paint up progressives as hypocrites.

Left to right, it remains pretty unchanged. Conservatives are a minority. Only now, they are a minority not in power because of split progressive votes.

It will be interesting to see if Trudeau follows through on election reforms, as it's the current system that's given him power. It's similar with Harper and the Senate, the desire is there, but the will and ability may be lacking.

As for 60% of voters voting "against" Trudeau, the main issue is that of secondary choices. I suspect many LPC votes were for their second favourite party, but more of an anti-Harper vote, than a pro-LPC vote.

Conversely, I believe support for the CPC is mostly their own plus a few swing Blue Liberals.

Looking at the Nanos "second choice" matrix from Oct 8-10 (last one I'd downloaded before), 34% of CPC voters, 49% NDP voters, 35% Green voters, and 6% Bloc voters liked the Liberals and Trudeau as a second choice. In most alternative voting system, that would be enough to give a majority of votes. On the flipside, the CPC had 20% support of LPC voters and 9% everyone else.

I'm not aware of the specific numbers from 2011, but the sentiment was that while a plurality of voters put down CPC, low turnout plus the nascent ABH movement lead to calls that it was unrepresentative. It's about equal to Alberta PC/WR complaining about vote splitting, while the NDP would probably have won regardless.

My only disappointment was that the Harper Conservatives still managed to hold onto to 99 odd seats.In the last days I thought the Liberals might pull off a majority but not as big a one as they got. My only regret is that the NDP took such big losses.Mulcair has principals and deserved a better result.It is amazing how close the polls called it in the closing days.

Just want to add my voice of thanks. You made sense of all of the poll results. Can't stress enough how much I got out of your work.

As an aside, I think that pundits and pollsters all were probably a little bit risk averse in describing what was happening. In my opinion this was due to three factors: typical avoidance of predictions outside the norm; recent past problems in capturing the dynamics in BC, AB, ON and QC; and the fact that there is a "shy Liberal" effect amongst the punditocracy, who had come to believe that "normal" had shifted right, and were generally unwilling to challenge that idea.

As a last aside, I think the die was cast when Mulcair opted out of the debates and effectively put himself up with Harper against all others. From there, every pronouncement that didn't challenge this view instead reinforced it. The niqab nonsense had an impact, but the ground was already fertile for that seed to be planted.

COMMENT MODERATION POLICY - Please be respectful when commenting. If choosing to remain anonymous, please sign your comment with some sort of pseudonym to avoid confusion. Please do not use any derogatory terms for fellow commenters, parties, or politicians. Inflammatory and overly partisan comments will not be posted. PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSION ON TOPIC.

Details on the methodology of the poll aggregation and seat projections are available here and here. Methodology for the forecasting model used during election campaigns is available here.

Projections on this site are subject to the margins of error of the opinion polls included in the model, as well as the unpredictable nature of politics at the riding level. The degree of uncertainty in the projections is also reflected by the projections' high and low ranges, when noted.

ThreeHundredEight.com is a non-partisan site and is committed to reporting on polls responsibly.